001Council Chambers and any remarks of Mr. >> No sir go to item number three. >> Yes sir. Mayor and council. Um so uh tonight's work session. Um I thought I'd give a little bit of background um for those that aren't aware. I think I've told a couple of the council members in oneonone, but for members of the public and um that that aren't aware, so several months ago, the mayor was approached. He serves on the small cities advisory committee for TML and he was approached um by a employee at TML and asked if he would on behalf of the small cities advisory committee put together a presentation for this year's TML conference um for having an ethics policy for a small city. Um and so he he agreed. IA reached out to myself and the
002city attorney and asked us if we would be interested in doing it as a uh as a um committee um a board uh panel I guess as you will uh presentation and so we started uh kind of putting together today's thoughts and best practices particularly with all the social media and everything is out there and then uh we came to realize that well it's been 22 years since Navasota's ethics policy and social and uh council relations policies were really dusted off and updated. So maybe this would be a good timely uh opportunity for us to review it, get council's concurrence and nod on yes, we all still agree this is right. Maybe do some updates along the way. Um and then when we speak at the TML conference, we can truly uh say with firsthand
003knowledge that yes, we've just gone through this uh this uh process with our own community and have upped our re uh reviewed ours and made sure that it's up to date. Um and incorporate that into the uh into the presentation. And so the mayor suggested that maybe we do a workshop, go through it, talk about it. Um Carrie and I have done some some put some thoughts together which we're going to review uh tonight, get your feedback. We will take notes. Uh and then we will come back at next council meeting with something for you to uh to adopt if you so choose. Uh so that's kind of the the purpose and the reason and how this came to be uh tonight. And so Carrie and I will kind of tag team and I'm sure
004the mayor will have some thoughts having been looking at it as well as we get ready for this uh um presentation that's coming up in a few weeks. Um but uh we will we will run through. So we'll start with the ethics policy. Um and you'll notice that it's the format is a little bit different because we did send you a draft document of the council relations policy uh I believe on Thursday or Friday. the ethics policy was a little bit different and and there's some areas where we wanted to have a little bit more of a discussion. Uh and so we will um we'll go through those kind of section by section. Um and so with with section one, which is the policy statement, the the current version was in your um packet. Uh
005the PowerPoint uh that I'm going to go through is there's a there's a hard copy there or you can see it on the screen. Um, but really just for the policy statement, just kind of updating the verbiage to make sure that we're being inclusive and we're using current terminology and the expectations of a public official, you know, some 22 years later after we adopted it initially. Uh and we also want to clarify that this policy does address both the legal compliance requirements but also it sets a higher ethical standard uh that that we want to promote promote a culture of respect and accountability within our organization and we start at the at the council level and and filter that through the entire organization. And then also um we thought about adding a definition section um
006to to get some of the key terms uh within the within this particular policy defined right inside the policy. And so uh we will incorporate those uh into the um the updated language. Not a lot of substantive changes there to the uh to the policy statement. As we get into the standards of conduct, um there were a couple opportunities to incorporate some references to the local government code. Um specifically, chapters 171, um 553, which I believe is nepotism, and 573, so reverse that. 553 is if if a public official is going to receive funds in exchange for selling property to the city, there's a disclosure requirement. 573 is is the nepotism right prohibition where you can't hire appoint family members to positions with the city. So >> yeah, so we just felt like, you know,
007having those cross referenced in our policy, making sure that they're consistent with the state law. Um and and again clarifying uh just updating the the use of uh city staff, property, funds, equipment is for official uh business only. um make sure that we prohibit attempts to influence staff uh decisions or procurement outcomes through threats, promises or special favors. Um and then as we get into thinking about digital communications and social media, making sure that even with those, we still have to be cognizant of not violating the Open Meetings Act and getting a quorum involved in discussion on um city business matters. uh even if it's a walking quorum where we end up posting on one another's uh posts so to speak. Um so again just incorporating those new technology items into uh into our policy
008to bring it uh bring it up to current and then exparte communications. Um just to to clarify there and add a requirement uh not only to um state verbally. Currently the the policy this section simply says that if there's exparte communications where you know a vendor that's on an agenda contacts one of you and and tries to sway your vote or get influence in some way. Um the current policy says you're supposed to disclose that publicly at the open public meeting. Um the the suggestion here would be not only that, but maybe do a written disclosure with the city secretary so that it's filed uh with the city secretary's office. Uh disclose it at the public meeting. uh and then also if if that disclosure doesn't resolve any potential prejudice then to abstain from discussion
009and deliberation on that uh particular matter. Um and that would that would apply not only to council but to boards and commissions as well that are uh operating in in quasi judicial or you know having decision-m um type of things and and Carrie was even going to put a kind of clarify what does that mean you know what is quasi judicial you want to add anything on that one? >> Yes sir. Uh an example would be uh for example tonight when the the city council is going to be considering the substandard building issue. So when you're when you're acting when a body is acting in a quasi judicial manner, you are um you're you're acting sort of like a court um you are applying you know rules or regulations or standards to a set of
010facts and then issuing an order related to the issu that matter that comes before the body. And so that would be one example. The substandard building determinations. The board of adjustment is another quasi judicial board. They have a set of standards that they are required to follow. If somebody appeals the decision of a u the building official or they want to get an exception to some of the zoning rules, then they can ask the board of adjustment to um grant those sorts of exceptions and that the board of adjustment can actually issue a binding order that um looks at the facts, looks at the the rules that are set forth um in the ordinance as adopted by the council and then you know make its determination. and then issue an order. So that's what a
011a quasi judicial matter is and the way the policy is worded. There are a couple of things that could be a little bit confusing. For example, personnel decisions in the list of quasi judicial matters. A personnel decision can be quasi judicial if for example that the person has a contract or there's some property interest that um the employee has no position. most employees are at will employees. So that I would want to clarify that a little bit. So I think um it's not going to require a whole lot of work to clarify what a quasi judicial matter is, but I think it does deserve a little bit of tweaking to make sure that it's clear. It's not not all personnel matters. Um so that's that's kind of the the rundown on what a quasi judicial
012matter is. >> Okay. question just said that if uh someone is expecting to get a contract from the city, I don't know them and they don't know me and they come by to introduce themselves and say I'm the one who's going to file for a contract for X what is that? So I think Carrie I think the question is would that constitute exparte communication that would need to be disclosed or is it is it only is it clear I'm sorry is it specific to only communications that are trying to influence a vote or is it any kind of communications >> it says um let's see make sure I get this language And right now you're reading from the current. It's not the proposed. >> Correct. That's that's right. >> So the language um expressly says
013if such communication is designed to influence the officials action on the matter. Right? >> So there there does have to be that element as well. you know, that that gets a little subjective if somebody just drops by that, you know, and introduces themsel. I mean, it, you know, we would it's kind of one of those situations where you would want to evaluate it on a case-by case basis. Um, you know, what was the purpose of them dropping by? Do they drop by all the time? Is this something that is out of the norm? You know, all those sorts of things come into to play. But the the policy says if the intent is to uh influence uh your action on the matter then that would be considered an explicit communication. >> Well, even their even
014their introduction could be taken that way. >> It could be. >> Well, if they come through and they say, "I'm uh so and so and I'm the land man for XYZ Corporation. uh we're going to be doing some work up in this area type thing and uh we're probably doing some business with you. I just wanted to come in and introduce myself. That's not >> I think it would have to be a a pending matter before the council. >> They have to be, you know, maybe at some point in the future. I think that's too attinuated to say that that would be an exploate communication. >> You know, if they're trying to build relationships, that's one thing, right? if they're if they're trying to say, "Oh, look, we've got this contract that's on, you know,
015tonight's agenda." >> Otherwise, otherwise it's starting to tie down just general business, general commerce. >> Correct. I think it's real common for, you know, people to come by, you know, better than I to introduce, maybe they're new realtors in the community or they're, you know, new business people in the community. And so, I'm sure you've had people come by and say, "Hey, just want to introduce introduce myself. um you know our business is new to the community and just wanted to say hey and you know let me know if you need anything or those sorts of things how can I help there's a difference there but but it really relates to a matter that is pending before council that they know is going to be uh soon pending before council >> that gave you what
016you need James I talked to Okay. >> I didn't want to move on unless you were good, Jere. >> All right. Um and then the next one is uh section 4 disclosure and and recusal procedures. Um kind of to bring it up to today. Um adding a requirement that the affidavit that previously that already exists. There's an there is potential for public disclosure andor an affidavit uh requiring those to be made uh before any deliberation uh and before the the abstension to be noted in the minutes uh announcing that conflict leaving the dis during the item and refraining from discussing the matter uh with staff outside of the meeting. adding um an online registry uh which would be common nowadays uh of those that are filed those affidavit that are filed and again clarifying uh
017as to the conflict of interest applicability and Carrie I think you had some additional notes on that conflict of interest section. >> Yes sir I sure did and section 4.2 two of the current policy. There's some language in there that can be misleading because it suggests that you can take your council member hat off and and go as a member of the public and speak to the matter that's pending before council. That is that is not true. The statute chapter 171 is very clear that um a public official when this applies should should not participate at all in the matter. that would include not only voting but also we need discussion and I don't think you can you can you can't just take your council member hat off and go to the podium and say
018well as a citizen I'd like to you know say xyz about this particular matter contract and so that's language that we're going to recommend and you'll see the red line deletions coming to uh the council at the next meeting but so that's something that um really just needs to be deleted >> that's been locked in though, hasn't it? >> Not that I can recall. >> It's been done in the past. It's been done in the >> city commission also. >> We've done it. >> Um I've seen I've seen it done. I'm done. >> It is because this policy applies to a city officer, employee, or advisory board member. So, that's one thing we're going to clarify. The definition of public official in this policy does not exist. And we're going to add that just to
019clarify because you can read some sections as applying to public officials and some sections list the employee, public official or city official or advisory board members. And so one thing we want to present to you next time is a is a real tight definition of what a public official is and what that includes. And we're going to ask for some direction from you all in terms of do you want to include employees? how how broad of a scope do you want to cast? Do you want to include advisory board members in terms of having to comply with this policy? So, those are some of the decision points that or direction from you that we're going to be asking for. Um, but the way this is worded now, council member, yes, sir, it does apply to
020an advisory board member. >> And you said that was section what of the code >> 4.2. So I am missing anything that's four. >> Oh I go from 3.8 to 5.1. Let's see. That's the current. >> Yep. Maintain >> this example that we had >> right here. And what you're just talking about was right in here. It's 5.1. What's in their book? But you said 4.2 page four. >> Your format was you printed it. >> So it would be 5.2 in your in your book. Okay. To get to get back to the example, we had if a member of the council had business that came before the court and they had to recuse themselves, then they recuse themselves, they would have to get somebody to represent them to present their case. They couldn't do it
021themselves. They couldn't go out as a member of the public >> in in municipal court. No, in in in the council meetings. >> That's correct. That's correct. If you if you if you have a substantial interest in the matter and you know, we can talk about what the definition that's another definition we're going to add what a substantial interest is. And that means that you have 10% ownership up from a business or you receive 10% or more of your income for the previous 12 months from that that entity or you uh own real property that is valued at $2,500 or more. >> Do we have to look at the amounts on those? >> Yeah, that's right. So, we would look at the amounts and and just evaluate whether or not you have a legal conflict
022of interest in that situation. Now, if you if you determine that, okay, maybe it's not a legal conflict of interest, but I prefer to abstain and just, you know, um uh not raise the issue or not create an issue even though it may be illegal and you just want to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, you you could do that. Um some city charters say that unless you have a legal conflict of interest, you you have to vote and cannot abstain, but our charter does not say that. So you would have that discretion. Um but but that would be the first step. Um council member is to look at what interest do you have in the matter? Is it considered a a substantial interest uh as defined in chapter 171? Again, we're going to we're
023going to clean the definitions up and and make sure that it's um clear as to what that means. Yes, sir. So it' be a really bright line test for you. So you can just say, "Okay, yeah. Well, I I own 5% of that company. it's not really a a legal conflict of interest, but I'm going to abstain anyway or, you know, um then we can just, you know, do do that evaluation of the the conflict at that potential conflict at that point. Does that answer your question? >> Yes. All right. So, next we have the uh reporting of ethics violations. Um and again this is um they kind of got out of order it looks like. So I don't maybe there was a change. This says section five on here. It's section seven in your
024in the in the current uh document. Um, but the recommendation is to revise and and and we're going to talk about these next couple sections. Uh, Carrie wanted to talk a little bit um more in depth about uh particularly with regard to the ethics commission um and the city attorney's involvement in this process. Um so the recommendation here is for the ethics commission to have the primary responsibility for enforcing this policy uh being the gatekeeper regarding the initial evaluation of the complaints um and having an independent legal counsel as opposed to the city attorney um uh advising the commission uh just because there is a potential that the city attorney uh could be subject to a bias because they work directly for the council. um doesn't have to be that way legally, but that would
025be our recommendation. And so we wanted to talk through that tonight. Um and then again, um kind of using this update to revise where the complaintant gets filed, what the form it takes, um what the ethics committee can uh do to refer it to a local prosecutor if necessary. Um and then referencing to uh the previous sections um to just correction correcting the the references. But Carrie, go ahead and talk a little bit about the uh city attorney's role in that as we get into >> Yes, sir. Mayor Council. Um, so as as Robert said, it would be illegal for the city attorney to um act as the gatekeeper to make that evaluation, but I think if if we are, you know, wanting to um I guess remove any potential for criticism where the city
026attorney is um looking at a matter and makes a decision and issues an opinion. in regarding a matter. The idea is that there there'd be a a a separation between um the work that the city attorney does for the council and the city as a whole. Um just so that there's no question about the independence um about any decision or opinion that is issued by the city attorney. Again, it it's legal for the city attorney to do that. Um, but the idea is to just um assure the public that there was no influence or bias or any sort of um it's kind of like, you know, in in the past, kings and emperors, they hired people to write their histories. And what kind of history do you think that person is going to write for
027uh the king or emperor that they're writing for? they're not gonna, you know, they're not going to be critical. I'm not saying that, and I'll just say me personally, I would certainly strive to be transparent. Um, uh, do things with integrity, you know, but there's there could always be this, you know, thing in the back of somebody's mind. Well, did he really was he really independent? Did he really um look at this in an objective manner? And so the idea behind using an independent legal counsel would be to remove that potential criticism. Um the downside is is that would cost additional funds if you had a complaint that was filed that needed to be evaluated. Um that that is uh one downside, but you're but you're also assuring the public that there's there's really an
028independent review of the matter. So um I'm comfortable either way. I think Robert's comfortable either way. It really depends on what y'all are comfortable with. Um, but I the recommendation would be to have an independent legal council uh review the matter as they come up and and be retained by the city to do that. And that's the reason why. And glad to answer any questions or I see that perspective. That certainly makes sense. >> Mhm. >> Yep. >> And that is that to hire someone who's independent would make sense. if there was something truly in violation of a policy. >> Sure. And that would be, you know, something that they would with in in conjunction with one of the other recommendations that we're making would be that the um that the ethics commission be the
029uh the gatekeeper to take a preliminary look at any complaint that is filed and using the advice of that independent council say yes, it meets the standards. you know what we need to proceed to holding a hearing and providing due process and an opportunity for the involved parties to to make their case or the ethics commission says no this is not it's not even within the u you know the jurisdiction of the ethics commission and is not a valid complaint make that determination and deny the u the complaint and um you know be the gatekeeper and say we're not going to move forward this is not a valid complaint as contemplated by the ethics policy >> to get to that point. >> Will it be a vote of the council to the majority of the
030council to get to that point >> to make a decision about the the complaint and whether it's valid or >> No, that would be what we're suggesting um would it would be the ethics commission. >> And who is the ethic? It would be a it would be a board that's appointed by the city council. >> It's actually coming up in section I think it's section eight in here and maybe we're going to reorganize it to get SE that coming up earlier in the policy. But that is coming up. We're going to talk about who is on the ethics commission how they you know that that matter. But this is this is specific for council, not staff, not >> Well, that's that's another one of those decision points that that we're going to ask for some
031direction on. Do you how how broad do you want this ethics policy to apply? Do you want it to apply to just the council, the council and the city manager, the council, the city manager, department heads, uh all employees, advisory boards and commissions. Um, some of it won't apply because, you know, certain employees might not have decision-m authority, but they can still have exparte communications with vendors. Um, you know, they can they can make certain decisions that, you know, we we would want to uh provide some reference points for them to make ethical decisions, those sorts of things. And so, um, that is some direction we're going to be asking for uh from you. you know, how how broad do you want to cast the uh the scope of the policy? >> Currently, it's just
032council. >> Um, well, the uh the conflict of interest provisions do apply to employees, advisory boards, and the council. So, right now it's it's pretty broad. Um there's some things that you know I said wouldn't apply to employees because of some of the limited decision-m facility the FBI certain employees had. But >> what's the cut off point? Where does it stop being an ethics violation and become a crime? >> Well, if you can if you can find a a provision in the penal code or another code that it violates, then it could be both. could be both an ethical violation, could be a criminal. >> Well, by by definition, if it's a crime, it's an ethical >> um >> violation. I >> if it's within the subject matter of the ethics policy, it could be
033a could be a crime that doesn't violate the ethic, you know, >> feeding, you know, that's a that's crime, but that's not an ethics violation. Maybe unless you're in a city vehicle and then it's a different different deal. So, >> but so he just stepped it up. What if you went lower and said that it the personnel policy? So could the the person could violate personnel policy and the ethics? That's correct. That that's true. I think there would be some overlap there. Yes, sir. >> And and and you know, we'll make sure that the ethics policy and the personnel policy are consistent with each other. So in the reporting someone files a complaint and they file it with the city secretary. Does the city secretary then well probably working with the city manager go to
034the city attorney with that and the city attorney then looks at it and says we better hire a private attorney or do they go right to a private attorney? What we're suggesting is that it would be it would go to the ethics commission and independent counsel for review. So the the independent council would um advise the commission about whether or not it is a a within the scope of the ethics policy and the ethics commission. What we're suggesting is the ethics commission make that decision based upon advice of council. >> We're making a quick jump to the ethics committee. >> Yes. we're having the complaint is made and it goes right to the ethics committee. >> Um but but not for for a preliminary review. It would be it would not be a there would
035not be a a hearing schedule on it. It would be a review of the complaint and the the form and the contents. Does it does it meet the the minimum requirements for um guess documenting or um does it does it contain all the elements for a a violation of the of the policy? And if not, then the ethics commission would say, you know, we're we're kicking it out. We're not moving forward. That's the end of it. um and deny the complaint. The complaint would not move forward. If if it were a a violation on its face, then the commission would say, "Okay, now we're going to schedule we're going to schedule a hearing on the matter where both both the complainant and the uh the person against whom the complaint is made will have an
036opportunity to present their case um with or without legal counsel. There would be a a a hearing that would involve due process where where both sides got to present their their facts, their reasons, their arguments as to whether or not a violation occurred. And then at that point, the ethics commission once the hearing concludes um would make a decision whether or not there was a violation that occurred, the violation of ethics policy. Is is there some stopping point in between the thing being filed and and the uh ethics commission? In other words, you have some people that that are born to complain. >> Sure. >> And they make a complaint. Is there some some way to stop it before it goes to the ethics committee if it's >> probably very questionable? Um yeah, are we
037reconvening? Are we unnecessarily convening an ethics committee to take care of every little uh complaint that comes in? Um, you could certainly establish a decision point by, you know, legal counsel to determine whether or not that is I think the the >> there needs to be some some kind of a gatekeeper sitting there saying, "Okay, this needs to go to the ethics committee." >> And and I guess that's what I was envisioning or we were envisioning as a gatekeeper would be the ethics commission. in a preliminary uh fashion, taking a look at it without having a hearing, that sort of thing. >> Review it, say >> it, say this is >> isn't going anywhere or we need to pursue or investigate or >> correct >> or hold a hearing as you say. >> Wouldn't Wouldn't
038it be better to have the city attorney acting as a gatekeeper? He's not going to be involved in being the gatekeeper to decide whether it should go to the committee or not. that that's that's possibility and I think that's the way I would like to discuss it now. >> Yeah, we don't have an ethics committee so I I can't see forming one just uh because somebody complained but I'm sorry this just came to me. There's a Dr. Seuss book. It's called the be watcher from ha and it's the one person's hired to watch this person because they need to watch that person to watch that person watch that person. Where does it stop? uh if if you have to find somebody to we're looking at hiring another attorney if this were to come up and
039then you're going to have to tie up five more citizens or whatever it is to review this um >> which may or may not be a a violation. I mean it it all seems to be necessary but >> so the the recommendation based on best practices that we were able to to discern and find in today's today's world is that that this isn't a just in case a complaint comes in it. Our recommendation is we form this ethics committee. We make appointments just like you do on every other board. they'd be on a two-year or some kind of um cycle and we we would hire have someone on retainer as an independent outside counsel and if an ethics complaint came in they would be the gatekeeper and review those just again it gives us complete
040distance and and it keeps us from the appearance of sweeping things under the rug. >> Totally get it. again. And if you all are comfortable and want the city attorney to serve as that initial gatekeeper, he he's willing to. We're that's just what not what we perceive as industry best practices, but it is legal. >> What towns or cities did you find that you're wanting to replicate or big cities, >> College Station? >> You know, I think we looked at several. Round Rock would be one. San Marcus. Um there are some others that Robert may have looked at. Um Brian looked at their their approach. Um and you know did looked at other materials that were presented at conferences too. >> It's a pessimistic approach. I'm sorry. It's a pessimistic approach that we're going to
041need an ethics committee. We haven't over the years, >> but and that's true, you know. So, I I don't, you know, I don't know if I would call it pessimistic. I would just I think you're just being prepared for when >> if and when one is filed because if one were filed now, you would need to make the appointments. you'd need to, you know, run through the process where um if you have this in place, you're >> we own lots of fire trucks, but just in case. >> Well, one could argue that life insurance is a pessimistic approach. >> Yes, it is. >> It all sounds very similar to like if something happened within the police department or the sheriff's department, it's automatic. They called in a Texas Rangers or something to investigate. It seems
042like and we would be doing somewhat the same thing by turning it over washing. We wouldn't be deciding yes it is, no it isn't. And as you use the great sweep it under the carpet, we don't want this out or something and then be a little bit more transparent. We're asking for people to sign up for these volunteer organizations, boards, and commissions. I didn't get them appointed one for two-year term and never call them. >> That would be our hope. >> Yeah. Hope it's going to discourage those people. Hopefully, >> I hope they don't have to >> unless the people were were selected by a position that they had that that might tie into their job so it wouldn't be out of their way to belong to the commission. >> Yeah. And that's you're going
043to see that in just a minute. I guess what I was going to suggest, Mr. mayors in the interest of time so we don't run short getting to the council meeting. I'll I'll go through the rest but clearly we've got some more discussion to have. So I I'll run through here. We'll continue to take some notes and um so advisory opinions are again that that's if if we're not sure if something reaches that magnitude or requires a conflict of interest disclosure, we can ask for an advisory opinion. Again, the city attorney's uh recommendation is that we use that outside counsel um and and have them issue the advisory opinions and then again using today's technology, we on our website have those um independent uh advisory opinions uh posted on the website. Thank you, Lupe. I
044was behind one. Uh and then as we get into the actual ethics commission, um there's two slides on this this one, I believe. Um let me make sure. Yeah. Uh so the thought would be to to revise the ethics commission membership and authority, make sure that we're clear there, empower them to be the gatekeeper. that again we're going to have more discussion on that based on what we were just talking about um for determining validity of a complaint, establishing the hearing process and procedures um and then granting authority of that ethics commission to issue sanctions um except where it's required to come to council or to through the city manager's office based on our charter. Um and then as we get into more specifics on that um that section the clarifying the composition uh the
045the recommendation would be uh that we try to ensure independence, expertise and lack of conflicts by using residents who have demonstrated high ethical standards and integrity. The recommendations are that we try to find those with a background that would be consistent with these kinds of matters such as um this is not a an exhaustive list. It's just some examples that we found online. Uh retired judges or attorneys, those that are in the ethics or compliance professions, uh retired city managers or city clerks, uh if you happen to have one that lives in your city, not making a recommendation for an appointment. That was a joke. Brad still lives here. And then academicians, those out of academia. I think we do have quite a number of residents that that come out of academia. So I think
046we have a variety of folks that that would be uh certainly meet those recommendations, but that's not the ex. It's not an exhaustive list. It was just a suggestion. And to to disallow u not only current officials from neighboring cities, but anyone that really has active matters before before this board. you you don't want them to end up in a conflict of interest themselves. So, we try to try to um avoid that. And then again, in in this we would define that this is updates because it's not in the current policy. Defining the terms of those appointments, what a quorum is, they're meeting procedures, the standards of proof, is it going to be preponderance of the evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt or beyond a reasonable doubt like in criminal cases. Uh due process,
047notices, right to counsel, opportunity to present evidence. Again, just just touching on all of those things and spelling it out for the committee. Um, and then as we get towards the end of it, uh, penalties, exemptions, and injunctions. We want to make sure that, um, or the recommendation is that the ethics commission be the primary uh, sanction authority. Uh, replacing the general discipline language that's in the current policy with a more tiered uh, stepped approach, uh, progressive discipline, if you will, like we hear in HR nowadays. uh narrowing section 8.3 is kind of broad and allows for waivers. Uh really we want to just make sure that that council has the authority to uh issue a waiver um where enforcement would not serve the public interest. Again, we want to be clear on that and
048Carrie had some ideas on kind of how to uh how to craft that a little better so it's a little clearer. Um and then requiring any sanction or waiver to be read into the record and posted uh online on our website. And then, oh, I'm sorry, I this was the slide I was on just now. And then, um, annual training requiring annual incorporating this into the annual training that we do for the open meetings act, public information act, uh, trainings, uh, particularly for newly appointed uh, officials, having periodic review of the policy. You know, it's been 22 years. it probably wouldn't hurt for us to maybe look at it a little bit more uh frequent than once every 22 years. Um and then again just um making applicability who who all does this apply to?
049That's again another conversation that we wanted to have uh this evening and I'm going to jump forward in just a second and then I'll come back to these things that uh as time allows. But applicability, you know, do do you want it to be council and boards and commissions? Do you you want I mean obviously as we're talking about there is potentially a cost with with regard to an ethics commission and hopefully we have a human resources department and we've got a personnel handbook that we're following that you all have h have adopted and it will incorporate these same uh policies. So in my mind, most of our employees are governed by the personnel handbook and we have a process for holding them accountable and making sure that things are investigated through human resources and
050through the regular chain. But perhaps as the city attorney said, the city manager who's a contract employee under you all, maybe department heads, maybe you all want it to be at least at that level where there is much more autonomy and much more accountability. Uh maybe you do want the ethics commission separately from human resources uh to to handle those kind of investigations particularly for department head levels or again it's open for open for you all's thoughts and and we will craft the document the way uh you all want it as we get into the council relations policy. Um I did this one a little bit different. I did one slide that just kind of gives the section uh titles I gave you the the the draft document I I had sent to you all.
051Um it because of this one was a little bit different. It's more on the uh relations with one another with other boards with staff members. Um and it didn't have quite the same type of changes and we didn't feel like the kind of discussions that we needed to have that we needed to go one by one. but wanted to have it and I think Lupe has that document ready if we need to put that up on the screen if there's any areas in specific that you wanted to talk about in these section but I did also add slides to talk about because the new part um were the appendices um and I'll be honest those actually came out of an AI you know what what other kind of updates can you do and AI came
052up with well you might want to have uh these appendices that have an ethics pledge your your guidelines for your social media guidelines, your annual acknowledgement form. Um, and and so that's where uh the idea for those came from and then they they were incorporated in there. Again, the these are recommendations at this point. They don't exist in your current policy, but they are as we try to incorporate today's industry best practices. Um, those uh those appendices are there. Um, and then I've got them listed if you wanted to go over any of those appendices. So, >> I would like to go over >> I think with that with that >> I would like to go over my, you know, one by one. I I don't think time probably would allow today, but I've got
053tons of questions >> on the sections or on the appendices. >> On the appendices. >> Okay. I've got Oh, sorry. But if you want to go go ahead and and go >> we can run through these and we can you know and we can um we can kind of go there or wherever you all want to go if you want to if you want to start there because we're there. >> If you're trying to show us something tonight because I know that I'm not in a big rush to try to approve anything. >> No, no. We're not this isn't on tonight's agenda. You're not approving it tonight and and we don't have to have it on next time. But we can we can work session it again. We can have more discussion. So we've got
05435 minutes now before >> just start and I'll come back with my question that you don't finish. >> Okay. Um okay. So this is yeah we're we're at in the appendix A is the council member civility and ethics pledge. And again um this is written specific to council but if you all wanted it to it could be it could be boards and commission members we can do it. We do have um something along this. It's not quite like this. This is brand new. Um but we do have um employees sign the personnel handbook and it's got um not it's not called a pledge but it is an acknowledgement that they know they are bound by all of the elements in the in the personnel handbook and uh if there's updates to that we document that
055as well. So uh we could certainly incorporate some of the language uh of this in into that exact same uh page. So, it it um this would be a a pledge that that council members or potentially appointees uh would have and it's just got a signature line below it. Um and then the second one is a social media guidelines for elected officials. And again, this just kind of covers um incorporating today's social media atmosphere uh into uh the these policies, making sure that we're we're behaving uh in a manner that upholds the public trust and we're being transparent. It's got some general principles there um and just uh spells out those expectations. the annual acknowledgement and compliance. Uh if we incorporate annual training, it just documents that we um understand the relations council relations policy,
056the ethics policy, the other appendices. Um and again, this one is also signed uh the intent would be that it would be signed annually. And then there is a council staff communication flowchart and protocol. Uh that's very hard to read. Um but on the um on here this uh would be again just consistent with our charter. It kind of shows that that council gives policy direction through the city manager uh and and then city manager gives administrative um oversight to the department heads who have supervision and coordination responsibilities of the city staff. Um, and then the last part of that communication protocol again just kind of spells out where it's derived from. Believe that's the last slide. So with that council, I'm sorry I I went fast to get through those, but now where would
057you all you want to jump back to the independent council discussion, go all the way back to that and and just kind of go through it in order or whatever y'all's pleasure. >> Well, my question would be since you opened up said that uh the mayor, you and the attorney is going to be presenting something. We hadn't heard from the mayor of I just I mean this is just something that that that was was important that that be updated or at least reviewed so that we all are have an understanding since it again since it hadn't been 20 years since it had been looked at and and also just for the public to realize that we do have self-imposed policies that we put on ourselves and I think that's important for everyone to know that
058>> I don't have anything specific. >> Okay. >> Um so just for clarification for myself you I feel like that we have been asked a many many many many questions and I don't know where to start. Okay. um we have 20 pages of something to review um that has a lot of information and then I think the way that you presented it here makes a lot more sense in my head as far as the sections. Um >> so I I don't I don't know where to start. I don't know what's the first thing that you're asking me. Let's settle. >> So, for for me, I think I I think the first um really thing to kind of get established for for myself and Carrie to know how to draft the the document is do do
059you all want the recommendation is that would be to go to a standing ethics committee with an independent council under under a retainer that if we get an ethics complaint, they are the initial gatekeeper. They do that initial evaluation completely removes us from the mix. Are y'all It didn't sound like there was an overwhelming comfort with that approach at least at your first blush or first instinct. So I think talking through that will give us the guidance on how we set up the rest of the document. >> Yeah. I think for me it's just a lot of information. It wasn't clear to me what you were asking from me. Gotcha. Um, and so I think it's a little more clear now, but I don't know that my mind is ready to >> Okay, >> this
060is a lot of lot of stuff. So, the first question I would say uh that it probably makes sense that we have an ethics commission. >> That probably makes sense. >> Um, I think that now how do you who do you appoint? I don't know. Uh, you know, where do you go from there? You tell me what the next thing is you want to know. It could not be established on a on an as needed basis instead of it being a hate to put people on a committee just to attract something to happen. >> Yeah. >> That doesn't that didn't happen. I just my my first reaction to making appointments or assigning an ethics commission only when it becomes necessary is it's kind of like kind of like in criminal cases where they try to
061get an unbiased jury >> and if they've already heard things about it. So if potentially if this is if the reason we need it is something that has already come to public light, are you going to be able to get unbiased people or are you potentially going to be appointing people who already go in with a preconceived hellbent on the hammer coming down or the opposite? Yeah. And and so I I I think doing it on a blue sky day where you make appointments and you have folks that are of clear mind to me is a more efficient way. But again, that's just my first thoughts on it. I think one other point would be that um if you have a standing ethics commission then they have you know they're familiar with the ordinance they're
062familiar with their standard because they would receive some training in terms of the ordinance and the standards versus if you if you appoint a commission as a complaint that's filed then then kind of like in your position they're having to you know they're absorbing all of this information prior they're going to have to do all that before actually taking a substantive look at the at the complaint. And so that would be one other advantage of having a standing committee because then they're they're trained in the in the ordinance and can hit the ground running so to speak. You know, it it again it does require work and um uh citizens to be available for that. But you know that would be one other point I would I would make about having a standing committee versus
063a uh an ad hoc appointment basis. Can we compare the standing ethics committee to a grand jury? >> Is that a good comparison? Um I think that um in some ways yes, but in in some ways an ethics commission actually has the ability, you know, the grand jury is limited to the the upfront part of the case. You know, they say, "Hey, yes, we're going to issue an indictment. We approve an indictment in this particular case." And then they're they're out of it. Then the prosecutor prosecutes. The ethics commission is there from the beginning. But again based upon a recommendation the ethics commission is there from the beginning and we'll see it all the way through and we'll end up making a decision um in some cases a recommendation to council depending on the whom
064the complaint is filed against but that would be one difference. You know the the grand jury is there for the a limited portion of the case. I'll put it that way. I'm thinking too that if you had a commission already placed, it would also be more transparent versus a case is brought before us, we appoint people, oh, they appointed that one because they knew that one would answer and it causes stuff. But if the committee is already appointed before anything comes up, they can't say that we picked and choose who we thought would be in our favor >> based on the situation. >> Does that have to be the first question that we answer? >> I'm just asking it. I mean, it seems to me like we should figure out what the policy is and
065if we're going to include staff or where that goes and then maybe work our way back up to >> certainly can >> and then to the commission or >> Yeah. Are we putting the cart before the horse a little bit? Just >> It It certainly seems like going over the meat of the policy uh and questions that we have regarding it might help lead us down a path of what the end result ends up being, what that looks like, makes the end vision more clear potentially. My thought would be the um the council, city manager, and the department heads is who it applies to. The applicability is what where you're going. Okay. What are the ethics violations that we're talking about in in general? What's what are the limitations to them? We've got nepatism. We've
066got uh bribery. Those those seem to be the main ones that we'd be talking about. But but those are covered by state law. So there would be some cross reference and and with respect to those policies, but we're talking about the conflicts of interest and and all of this is set out in the standards of conduct portion of ethics policy. So it would be things like representing um representing a private person in front of a governing body, you know, um say a council member representing somebody in front of the the board of adjustment. Um exparte communications is something that was covered before. um gifts there. The policy would set a um a batline rule in terms of the value of gifts. You know, a meal would be okay, but you know, tickets to the um
067you know, the&m Alabama game would not be uh something that would be acceptable. So, we're suggesting a $50 limit in terms of any any gifts that need that could be accepted. um not making personal use of city equipment or staff for your own personal interests. Um things of that nature, you know, disclosing any financial interest that you may have in the sale of property to the to the city. Mhm. >> the provisions that are outlined in the standards of conduct section. >> So there's there's more than just the nepotism, more than just the confidence of interest, more than just the uh the other state laws that we've covered. So it's it's it's more broadly worded than state law. So it does raise the level of you've got legal compliance versus, you know, here's a standard
068of conduct that um we as a city council have, as the mayor put it, imposed on ourselves. Yeah, these are the this is the reference point that we're going to create for ourselves because we want to we want the public to know that, you know, we're transparent, we're accountable, um we operate with integrity and those sorts of things. So, um, I'll stop there and see if you have any any question. Did you have some specifics on the appendices? I think you said there. >> No, I had to talk about wrong lines on the the council relationship policy. Do they give you something to work with, Robert? You need more information on it though what we just discussed? >> No, I think I I think this is the the time for us to to have the,
069you know, to kind of go into those. I think we've you you've thrown out the applicability um a thought on that. I haven't heard any contrary to that, so I made a note of it. Um unless there's other thoughts. Um, but I I think um I think certainly as Councilman Folz or Mayor Pro Tim Folultz uh recommended, if we want to go through the the other uh meat and potatoes items uh before we decide about the uh independent council and the and the standing committee, then we can we can certainly do that. If if you want to jump to the council relations policy, we can put that up. And if there's a specific section that you wanted to talk about, we can we can do that too or whatever pleasure of the council. >> Is
070the new policy that you have put out is it are you expecting that like council relations with one another is um section 4. So, we have this all of these pages that have a whole bunch of bullet points, but they don't align with anything that's in the past um policy. So, I don't know. It's basically you're just taking out the entire old policy. >> Yeah, it's really incorporated into there. It just we we felt like after looking at what I felt like I'm the one that did the the organization on that one just felt like really to bring it up to what what is consistent with most places nowadays. Bringing it up to to a more standalone document with those kind of sections seemed a little bit more consistent with industry. Uh and so I
071just kind of rolled our old policy into that. But it was really difficult for me to do it as a redline document. >> And there's no way really to compare section 10 with a potential section 10 here. It's just a whole new document. >> Well, the sections are pretty consistent. I thought >> I'm sorry. They they're not numbered is the only thing. So, >> correct. I just I just numbered them, you know, from the main sections. I I went through and put numbers to them so that again so when we start thinking about the future and someone looking stuff up like chapter numbers felt a little bit more organized. >> I I think that would have been helpful. My copy does not have numbers. >> Correct. The current policy doesn't have them. So the the
072current chap uh council relations Sorry, I this is the current one and it says section 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 and then if I go to the first page of this there is no section number or anything. So, I'm just it's hard to to even know what I'm comparing, >> right? The the because I think that what you're looking at that current one is the ethics policy. The only thing in your book is the current ethics and then council relations. I don't I don't know. Right, Susie? >> Yes, >> that's what I thought. >> Council relations with city staff, but it doesn't reference a number. >> Correct. That's the council relations policy. >> Totally different than the first section. >> That's the ethics policy, right? Right. Thank you. Yes, sir. Sorry about that. It was >>
073that's >> I don't have what they're looking at, so I don't know. All I have in this book >> on the council relations with city staff uh limiting the directly to the city manager, city city attorney, city secretary, department heads. Uh I'm I'm wondering about relations with the council with the uh with the city attorney if there should be a gatekeeper there or something or because because there is among other things there's a a monetary thing since we paid the city attorney by his billable hours. uh that for anybody on staff just or on the council just being able to willy-nilly contact the uh city attorney. That shouldn't be limited in going through the say the city manager. Council member, we do have um in our relations with other clients, some of them do appoint
074um or designate points of contact um that if a question, a potential project comes through anyone other than the designated person or persons from by council that you know, we would we would call the city manager and say, "Hey, is this okay to be working on or um call the mayor something like that. So each city does it does it differently and um you know I think that would be up to your discretion as a council to to u to set and say okay if if there is a um here's how we want the the flow to work. You know that's got to be approved by the city manager before we you know um you know turn on the computer and do any research on it or anything like that. I think that would be
075up to the council to determine how you how you want uh your legal services to be provided and incurred by the by the city. >> Okay. Don't Well, I guess I'll I'll start with some questions. It look like we've got 13 14 minutes from what you sent us in an email. policies and protocol related to conduct. Got some questions there. Um, reflecting council opinion. Uh, council members should remember they speak only for themselves and not for other council members. Is that through all conversation or is that just out in the public or can you explain that? >> Well, I I think it it it applies. So, Lupe, we're on the uh the document, the word document. I think we're on page four, section three. Um I I think that's just a a a statement of
076fact that that council members when they are engaging in discussion um don't speak for other members of council. They each each person on here gets one vote um independent of one another and doesn't speak for each other. they speak the the council only speaks in the collective when seated at this dis. So I guess when we're talking up here, I guess it's something similar to when we had the appointment of Grant here. We when we came out of executive session when I made the statement that uh I'm speaking for James, you know, I make myself clear that I wasn't speaking for the council, >> right? >> Is that I think that's exactly Yeah. I think I don't think this is referencing anyone has done anything wrong. That's just it's just stating exactly what you just
077said. Yeah, when when council speaks and sometimes because it can get confusing in public particularly if if they know your position sometimes it can get confusing. So you be you're you need to be clear and you know that that we've all done that from time to time making sure that we say hey I'm speaking only on just my opinion this isn't the opinion of the city or of the council or of you know >> okay then on that same uh section three uh ceremonial events uh request for the city repres representation of ceremonial events will be managed by city staff. The mayors serve as the primary representative. If unable, staff will determine if the event organizer would like another council member to attend. But if you go down a little bit further, it says that
078uh somewhere in this document that you said that if the mayor can't make it, staff will appoint someone to go. >> Did somebody else remember reading that? Council members. >> Well, I think that staff takes care of of trying to find somebody else to substitute, but I don't think it. >> But if can't do anything is doesn't it fall to the mayor pro team? It should. Well, I think that's just an administrative matter of the staff. >> No, but it's in the policy though. We're talking about voting on on this. So, you know, I'm just trying to make sure that we we all know what's in it. >> I didn't read it that way. >> What' you say? >> I said I didn't read it that way. I was Well, you know, we all we
079all have different interpretations of ESA. I don't think that we need to rush through this because when we rush through it, we're going to miss something. And and I think that I need to sit down with you. I've got a ton of questions, but we can be here all night. I think that you and I just need to you explain it to me and everything cuz >> Okay. >> Yeah. And and I I what I was going to re what I was going to suggest since we are getting getting close um we we can finish up with whatever questions are remaining time, but then I was just going to suggest um I don't think we're ready to put it on the next agenda. We'll we will um if that workshop is already full, then we'll
080just push it to the next one. Again, we we've started the process. We're going through the process. Our intent was to go through it, make sure that we get everyone's input, that we create the document that you all want, and that we will bring that document to you all to adopt. So, not suggesting that we rush it at all. Um, >> and then you can meet oneonone. You know, we can we can certainly meet one-on-one as as often as we need to until we, you know, to kind of go through them one by one and then again have open discussion at at here when we uh come back with them. >> I found that the >> already have one in place now and it's >> Yeah, I I don't see nothing wrong with it, but
081you know, I think that we just may need to add to it. >> We're just looking at enhancing it or updating it basically. >> Yeah. >> Sure. don't want to make it any longer than it has to be. >> I I found that this council relations policy uh answered most of my questions, but the problem is that that uh a lot of waters passed under the bridge since we uh adopted it. a lot of uh progress has been made in communications of various kinds and I I don't know that's that's not in my belly wick to decide if we're covering all of the the new changes things that are affected through the new changes but I found that what we have here is good but it can probably be better with that and I'll defer
082to my technical for >> one other quick question here that um um on the the uh correspondent signatures. >> Mhm. >> U council members should coordinate with staff before responding to public correspondence to ensure accuracy. So if someone sent me an email, I I need to refer to staff before replying to that. So, I think if it's I think the intent here is not to derail your individual communications with with your constituents, but where there's where someone is asking for progress updates or things about ongoing city matters where it might be necessary to get a validation on timelines or work project progress that's been completed or thing. >> Maybe this can be worded a little better, but I I think the intent here is simply to coordinate that to make sure that we don't give
083um false information or false false. Yeah. Just make sure that we're given accurate information when we are giving uh information out so that we don't again end up with broken promises or the appearance thereof. just u in in reading all the the new stuff I'm going call it uh all five of them up here Grant was appointed but before then he was elected we all are elected by the people and from what I'm reading through some of this is that some of the power is want to be taken away from the council and put more on toward was the staff and before I talked too much, I wanted to just sit down with you and just talk oneonone with you. >> Okay, >> that that wasn't certainly wasn't the intent. The intent was to be
084consistent with our charter, but it I want to make sure that we have those conversations and we can get Carrie, you know, involved at where where we need to and make make sure that it's again consistent with with what the charter is. Then we were just trying to reduce to writing what the expectations are there in. >> And you know, like I said, interpretation could be wrong, but we'll we'll make it clear. Okay, we'll get there. All right. Well, we'll adjourn.